re: 16% higher than normal all cause death in Europe

I got my stats from the same site for the UK, so I'm skeptical of his accounting already.

Also, the Eustat homepage, which you also linked, shows that the excess death number is down from a high of 26% from November 2021, and from an all-time high of 40% in November 2020. Maybe the author doesn't understand anything about demographics, but so far I'm extremely skeptical. I have a feeling this video is going to be about as stupid as I imagine it will be, because it seems like the guy is looking at data in isolation, which isn't how you approach demographic information.

quote:

---

Let's not watch the video to find out what he understands or how he arrived at his numbers because he tells you in the video.

---

I'd rather read an article. I've watched nearly all these insane videos from vaccine skeptics and most were so stupid as to beggar belief.

Given that the trend of excess death is relevant, and excess mortality appears to be cyclical, it's odd that vaccines are mentioned at all, unless you believe that COVID isn't an extremely deadly illness, with a CFR that is 2.9% for ages 65 and older, and then upwards of 40% for the very old. Seems like there is another variable (actually two) you should consider.

quote:

---

Here is an opportunity to learn something and you have spent more time bitching about the quality of the data which you have not taken the effort to understand than it would have taken to watch the video and understand his methods.

---

I'm finally home so I will check it out. If it is retarded, I'm going to say so.

I'm super excited to see you fumble basic aspects of immunology and now demographics and then respond with impotent rage. The important question, for you it would seem, is does this guy outrank me in credentials, and obviously not the actual content of my argument. In the first 1 minute 30 seconds, he already doesn't seem to grasp a key fact about demographics, but am I allowed to point that out or does my 'lack of experience' somehow negate that point?

quote:

---

It stands to reason it would be higher after the lockdowns end.

But, oh yeah, that doesn’t support your narrative.

---

You think a double digit increase in excess deaths sounds reasonable?

So firstly, he's taking the document a little too much at face value with regards to the percentage increase from the five-year previous average. In both the Scottish data and the data from England and Wales a dramatic decrease for some reason in total deaths from a historical norm. From 1900-1993, Scotland averaged 66689 deaths per year. From 1993 to 2019, they averaged 57078 deaths per year. That is a more pronounced decrease in deaths versus the England and Wales data, with a 14.4% decrease in Scotland versus a 9.5% decrease in England and Wales. While governmental organizations might want to highlight the decreased deaths relative to historical averages (especially in terms of the NHS), the more interesting question is why did Scotland, England, and Wales see that decrease in the first place?

The document he uses doesn't really touch on causes of deaths, but the UK does produce documents that do categorize deaths by cause. The 2021 report, linked here, shows that the major causes of deaths for 2021 were all long-term illnesses except COVID. I'd wager a lot of money that these same illnesses will make up a lot of the deaths for 2022, likely in similar proportions, but we will have to wait till June 2023 to get that data.

This guy is not accounting for two factors. Firstly, these registered deaths include deaths of non-UK nationals which will not be reported as deaths in the final UK demographic data. That is also a possible mediating factor in the differences in the life tables as well, because demographic information is not always straight-forward. That's a relatively small aspect of this though that I wanted to mention because at some point some time in the future, some conspiracy nut will get his hands on the data and completely misunderstand it. The other thing he doesn't understand is that the context of death data is always related to the population pyramid.

In 1993, for example, the UK had a population of 57,602,278, with 11984415 people above 60 years old. The population was the largest with the group that was 20-34, as there were 13338562 people in that age range, making up 23% of the population. Since that time, the total number and the proportion of people who were above 60 years old increased significantly, especially in demographic terms, with 17178399 people making up that age group, making up 25% of the total population of 68 million. In contrast, the 20-34 age group makes up 13013009, a smaller total number than 30 years ago, and they make up only 19% of the population, which in demographic terms is an immense decrease, bordering on a catastrophe, which reflects the long-term effects of a sub-replacement total fertility rate.

Taking excess deaths in isolation without reference to the overall population structure is such a fundamental mistake that it's hard to take people seriously if they aren't contextualizing it properly. What you have is a population pyramid that is aging into the exact brackets where long-term illnesses seek some sort of resolution, all within the context of those exact age brackets seeing increased CFR from a virus, it's not hard to see why the UK might be seeing excess deaths relative to recent averages, not to mention Europe as a whole. But in reference to itself, excess deaths is not as useful as people are seeming to make it.

quote:

---

My personal bet is vaccinated catching covid.

---

The world is going to be nothing but 3rd world countries, China, and the US will be filled with conservatives and a few hippies.

quote:

---

The important question, for you it would seem, is does this guy outrank me in credentials, and obviously not the actual content of my argument.

---

Anyone who’s getting something published outranks you in credentials. You just haven’t figured that out.

You have a keen grasp of what’s wrong in an argument. You just can’t quite make it to what’s right. You have lots of time to get better at it.

quote:

---

Thank you. So, a better way to look at the data would be in age groups and rates per 100K?

---

The concerning aspect for me is the excess death in younger age groups. That should be relatively rare in periods of relative peace, so something else is at issue. It could be lockdown related, and the knock-on effect could be that we see excess deaths in this age group going forward for maybe the rest of the decade if the economic forecast the rest of the decade remains as gloomy.

quote:

---

The concerning aspect for me is the excess death in younger age groups. That should be relatively rare in periods of relative peace, so something else is at issue. It could be lockdown related, and the knock-on effect could be that we see excess deaths

---

Could it be the overdose issue with young people?